A peep into life in Africa, through the eyes of an African Reformed Baptist pastor.

Water, water, water, everywhere. What else do you expect? I am a Baptist, and I live in the land of the mighty Victoria Falls!

Friday, December 30, 2011

Zambia as a Christian Nation

(What you have below is a slight
updating of a paper I presented at a Council of Churches in Zambia (CCZ) church
leaders forum, which took place at the Anglican Church in Kabwata on 17th September 2005. It was initially entitled “Why It Is Wrong To Constitutionalise
Christianity In The Zambian Constitution.” I have decided to re-issue this
statement because today marks the 20th anniversary of the
declaration of Zambia as a Christian nation by the late president, FTJ Chiluba.
It is a good juncture to restate my convictions about this issue. Pardon its
length!)

Late President, FTJ Chiluba

Let
me begin by stating that as I argue for the reason why Christians should NOT
insist on Zambia being constitutionally declared a Christian nation, I am painfully aware that
there are some very good colleagues of mine who think otherwise. I
have the greatest respect for them, though, as you shall see from this paper, I
seriously beg to differ with them on this point. I do not doubt the good
intentions of many of those who want Zambia to be a Christian nation by
constitutionalising Christianity, but I think that they are still wrong.

The reasons
given

The
reasons that have been given for the declaration of Zambia as a Christian
nation and for putting this into the constitution are many. However, when you
have assessed all of them, in the end they can be classified under four
sections:

1. So
that Zambia can be governed by righteous laws. The assumption
made by those who put this argument forward is that righteous laws will only be
ours if there is a declaration in the constitution. ANSWER: Sadly, that is not
the case. Righteous laws will be part of this nation if the church does its
God-given work. The church is to achieve this, not by forcing the majority’s
religion upon the minority but by our being salt and light in the world. We are
to work like yeast in the dough. That is the way in which we will ensure that
the laws we see to be right are enacted in the nation. As we permeate society
with the Word of God, the majority will want righteous laws to be enacted over
the land. That is the way we are to do it.

2. So
that we can have the blessing of God. This is a rather
superstitious reason. There are many who think that the kind of pronouncement
that was made by President Chiluba in 1991 and the subsequent inclusion of the
statement in the constitution will bring economic prosperity to Zambia. ANSWER:
That has never been God’s way of doing things. Mere declarations do not change
a culture of laziness and corruption that stifles growth and kills a nation.
Rather it is as those of us who are Christians learn to put the Bible into
practice through stewardship, hard work, and faithfulness that prosperity will
come. To attempt any other method is mere superstition and it will fail in the
end—much to our shame.

3. It
is just a matter of fact. 80% of Zambians are Christians. We
pray when opening Parliament, our presidents have been Christians, etc. ANSWER:
If this is the reason, then there are so many “Christian” nations in Africa and
the world. So I wonder why we should be fighting over the matter. Then South
Africa, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Botswana, Namibia, Swaziland, Britain, America, etc.,
are all “Christian” nations. So, why the fuss? Surely, there must be something
more we are trying to do than just stating a fact.

4. If
Muslims have declared their nations as Muslim nations and even instituted
Sharia Law, we should also do the same. Many who put
forward this reason are aware of the suffering that Christians in Muslim
nations are going through for their faith and they want to prevent that from
happening here by a constitutional declaration. ANSWER: Sadly, this kind of
reasoning makes Muslims call the tune and we dance to it. No, as Christians we
should be the ones showing the Muslim world how civilisation ought to be
carried forward. Remember also that when Israel started wanting to be like
other nations, that was the beginning of their downfall. It will be the same
for the church. Rather, we must follow the Word of God as a church. Also, we
need to understand that there is one major difference between Christianity and
Islam that makes such copying erroneous. Islam is essentially territorial. It
thinks in terms of taking over actual political power and square kilometres of
land, even if the majority in that place are not Muslims. Then from the outside
it enforces its religious norms on the people under its power and on its
territory. Christianity is not like that. Christianity works like yeast in a
batch of dough. It captures individuals one by one, through reason and regeneration
by the power of God’s Holy Spirit. Thus it works from the inside out. That is
why Christianity does not need political power to be on its side and does not
force itself on people. And yet it’s the most powerful force in the world!

The
doctrinal error

It
seems to me that the greatest problem with this declaration and its
documentation in the Zambian constitution is that in fact the whole thing is a
serious doctrinal error. According to the Bible, there is only one “Christian”
nation. It is the church. The Bible says, “You [the church] are a chosen
people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you
may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his
wonderful light. Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God;
once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy” (1 Peter
2:9-10). At one time, in the Old Testament, this was the special privilege of
the nation of Israel (see Exodus 19:6). But ever since the Lord Jesus came into
the world to inaugurate the New Testament church, this privilege has been
passed on to the church. No one has the right to pass it onto another group,
however well meaning he might be.

Many
people go to the text that says, “Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD”
(Psalm 33:12 and 144:15) and use this to teach that if a president or
constitution can state that the nation belongs to the Lord then blessings will
flow upon that nation. But is that what this text is teaching? Look at the context
of this verse and you will see that it specifically refers to the nation of
Israel. Psalm 33:12 says, “Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD, the
people he chose for his inheritance” (Psalm 33:12). Who are those people whom
God chose for his inheritance? It is the nation of Israel in the Old Testament
and the church in the New Testament. To apply that to Zambia is crazy, to say
the least. In fact, in this text it is not us choosing God but God choosing a
people to be his. The text says, “Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD,
the people he chose for his
inheritance.” Do you see the error of using this verse to justify declaring
Zambia as a Christian nation? It is torturing a verse until it confesses a lie!

The
corrupting effect

Another
reason why we should be very concerned as Christians about this declaration is
that when in history a thing like this has happened the result has been the
corrupting of the church. This was the case when Emperor Constantine declared
his entire empire Christian. The persecuted church, which had turned its world
upside down with the gospel, soon lost its spiritual power as corruption
entered into it. It has been the same right across the ages. When the church
and the state have joined hands in the dark, daggers have begun to fly to the
hurt of the innocent. Remember that the Spanish inquisition was done in the
name of Christianity when the church had locked hands with the state. Without
over-personalising the issue, I say, look at the marriages and family lives of
those who were in the fore-front of the declaration of Zambia as a Christian
nation. Look also at what has come to light concerning where state funds went
ever since pastors started going around with diplomatic passports. I repeat: These
steps only injure the church and its testimony. It has been the same across
history and it has already repeated itself in Zambia. Things will only get
worse if we do not learn from history. We must never go that way!

What
do we want to achieve?

The
question that must be asked by every sane individual is, “What do we really
want to achieve as Christians by this declaration?” Many people have begun to
claim all kinds of advantages which will be ours as a church in Zambia if this
declaration is upheld, which to my mind do not need the declaration at all! For
instance, do we really need a declaration in a constitution in order for those
of us who are Christians to actively participate in politics, or those of us
who are church leaders to pray at functions where we are called to participate,
or to pray and counsel with the state president at his wish, or to invite
preachers from abroad to preach among us, or to establish more and more
churches around the country, or to have Christian programmes on radio or
television, etc.? I do not think so. We have been doing all these things since
Independence in 1964, well before 1991; so we do not need it in order to
continue.

On
the other hand, if this declaration is meant to give the church an advantage
over people of other faiths in the governance of the nation, to secure
diplomatic passports for church clergy, to gain appointments for some clergy
into positions in government, to have exclusive rights to proselytise over the
airwaves, to use state funds to put up church buildings and purchase church
pews, etc., then it is wrong. There is no biblical argument for the church to
secure such favours from the state. Apart from that we should realise that
state funds are taxed from every citizen, whatever his religious inclinations,
and so must be shared equally. To give undue advantage to one religion over and
against another is to be unfair—even if that religion is Christianity.

How
we should achieve our goals

There
is no doubt that the Christian church has work on this earth to win the lost to
Christ and to build them up in their most holy faith. My point is that we do
not need the state to be on our side in order for us to do this. All we need is
space. That is all. To claim that by some decree of parliament, or constituent
assembly, or state president we can achieve more spiritual fruit in this nation
is to totally miss the nature of Christianity. It is at most a mere fruit of
superstition or at least a failure to realise what the Bible means when it
says, “For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does.
The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary,
they have divine power to demolish strongholds” (2 Corinthians 10:3-4). We are
to win the world through prayer and the preaching of the gospel, and not
through any undue advantage given to us by presidential decree. This is what
Paul wanted Timothy to know as a young pastor of a church. He said, “I urge,
then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be
made for everyone – for kings and all those in authority, that we may live
peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. This is good, and
pleases God our Saviour, who wants all men to be saved and to come to the
knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and
men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men – the
testimony given in its proper time. And for this purpose I was appointed a
herald and an apostle-I am telling the truth, I am not lying-and a teacher of
the true faith to the Gentiles” (1 Timothy 2:1-7). Notice the combination of
prayer, preaching, and the quiet lives of Christians as a witness for Christ.
Let people become Christians because they see the way in which those of us who
are Christians conduct our lives in the home and the work place. When our lives
adorn the gospel, and our preachers faithfully preach the gospel, then our
neighbours will come to Christ. And as more and more of our neighbours become
Christians then we shall see them enact righteous laws and obey them
whole-heartedly. This is the Zambia we want, and this is the biblical way to
achieve it. So, let us not seek to achieve this in any other way.

What
the State really is

Perhaps
the best place to end this presentation is by bringing us back to first
principles. What is the state and what is the church? Once we come to a
biblical understanding of these two institutions and what their purposes are,
we will have no problem seeing the absurdity of declaring Zambia a Christian
nation (or a secular state) and enshrining it in the constitution.

The
state (or national government) is there primarily to protect the vulnerable by
regulating relationships and punishing offenders beyond the immediate context
of the family (domestic government). If it were not for the fact that families
have to co-exist in a sinful world there would be no need for national government.
Each home would merely look after its affairs. But what happens when a husband
falls in love with a sweet sixteen and kicks his wife out of the home? The
state comes in by regulating the only legitimate context in which a husband
could do that. It also protects the woman who is kicked out by ensuring that
her interests are taken care of. Also, in cases where an external enemy (either
a thief breaking into a home or a foreign army invading a village) threatens
its citizens the state has a police service and an army to protect the
vulnerable. That is the job of the state. Nothing more. It, therefore,
functions on the premise of natural law and fairness. It is a gift of God for
the whole of humanity to ensure co-existence and peace. We must not give the
state any greater role than that. Many of us have reached a point where we want
the government to even come and sweep the dirt in front of our door! That is
wrong. Apart from ensuring this mutual co-existence through the protection of
the more vulnerable among us, we ourselves as individual citizens and as homes
must do the rest.

The
church on the other hand is redemptive. Its work is that of bringing people
into the right relationship with God. It needs to be very defined as to its
belief systems because it is not about protection primarily but about taking
people somewhere—to God. Who that God is, what he wants from us, and what he
plans to do for us and to us, is what religion is all about. Concerning those
matters, the church will want to be very definite. In that sense, through its
teachings, the church will have an influence on the state—but only indirectly.
Its influence will be upon the individuals whom it has convinced as to its
point of view. As these individuals carry out their responsibilities within the
pale of the state (or government) their decisions shall be coloured by their
individual belief systems. Where this clashes with that of others, the state
will come in only to protect the vulnerable from physical harm. That is all.
The state must never go beyond this.

This
is why it is crazy to want to define the state in religious terms. It is simply
an institution to ensure the protection of the vulnerable on the basis of
natural law. That natural law of fairness is plain even to a child who has not
been to school or church because it is deeply ingrained in us. The child may
not know how to work out the finer details of fairness but when those who are
knowledgeable have done their work, the child will see that the action taken
has been fair. Therefore, there is no need to give the state a preamble of some
religion or other. It should be left to do its primary job, and the
constitution should be primarily about that and nothing more.

Conclusion

I know that one
of the main worries of my brothers who want to ensure that no-one tampers with
the declaration of Zambia as a Christian nation is that those who are opposing
that stance want it to be instead declared as a secular state. I am equally
opposed to that. Let us simply leave Zambia as it is. Some may say that by
defining or describing the nation as secular we are avoiding giving it a
religion. Secularism is a religion. Its god is the human being and what he
wants. This is what is killing Western civilisation. We obviously do not want
it here. Let us simply enjoy being “one Zambia, one nation”! What matters is
that the vulnerable among us are being protected by regulations and
enforcements that make sense to true natural justice. Amen!

I tremble as I come between two "giants" Conrad and Anderson. In favor of Pastor Mbewe's posting, I would like to say regardless of our Lord's ultimate Lordship over all, the world is the world. Our instructions are very clear (2Corintians 6:14-18; 1 John 2:15). This side of eternity it does seem so clear that the Lord wants us to relate that way. We are to be the light and the salt in the world. We must not christianize the world, but preach Christianity in the world in such a way that the world and Christianity continue to stand different. I believe this is God's design until he completely removes evil (John 17).

Hi David, I have read your blog and I see more bible references in this blog than in yours (though I cannot remember any references in yours). Which leads me to ask, do you have any biblical warrant for holding your position? Now, your point in the blog regarding Christ's lordship over the whole world, we should ask how is Christ Lord today regarding the church and the world? How is Christ extending his kingdom? When I consider all this I come to a conclusion that Ps Mbewe is correct.

Ooh, computers can be annoying. I typed it all out then it vanished! Try again...

Thanks for the feedback. Francis, you must be confusing me with someone else. My blogs may appear weighty and powerful, but my bodily presence - that's something else entirely! ;-)

The meaning of the word "world" in 1 John 2:15 seems to be explained by the very next verse; John is speaking of the alternative "world system" headed by Satan in opposition to the kingdom of God. He is not making a church/everything-else dichotomy. Daniel and Mordecai served in pagan empires and were commended by God (e.g. Ezekiel 14:14) - so we can't understand 1 John 2:15 in such a way that we end up condemning Christian politicians who are, like them, trying to operate under the Lordship of Christ.

2 Cor 6:14-18 tell us to not be unequally yoked with unbelievers, and that would be something for Christian politicians to take to heart; however, again, surely if we end up with a position that would condemn someone like Daniel whom the Bible commends then we must be mis-interpreting the meaning. Involvement in the state is not automatically worldly - the state is God's servant, not Satan's (Romans 13).

Luckson, my point was the Lordship of Christ over all things, not only over the church. "yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist." - 1 Corinthians 8:6. The state is part of this "all things". As the state is God-given (Romans 13), it is not something opposed to Christ's Lordship to be abolished (like brothels or dens of thieves), but therefore something to be brought into submission to his mind. God's mind is revealed in his word (John 17:17). Therefore, the state should submit to God's word.

Brother Conrad ends by writing that "Let us simply enjoy being “one Zambia, one nation”! What matters is that the vulnerable among us are being protected by regulations and enforcements that make sense to true natural justice." But, how do we know that these things matter? Who told us and placed it in our hearts by the Spirit? Christ did, and he reveals his mind in the Bible. How can it be wrong if the state were to explicitly confess "we learnt these things from Jesus, and we are doing what we should when we keep learning from him?"

Historically it's the influence of the Christian church that has lifted such priorities up the state's agenda (instead of say, just crushing or ignoring the weak so they don't drain valuable resources).

This does not mean that we confuse the state with the kingdom or with the church. They remain distinct, even whilst both are legitimate spheres for us to lift up the banner of Christ within.

Genesis 1:1 tells that God made the heavens and the earth and everything in them. The people of God should be concerned with every rightful part of creation. The state is a very major part. This does not mean we think that good laws or politics can save people, or anything like that - but it does mean that we want Christ to be honoured explicitly everywhere, and without hypocrisy (as brother Mbewe says) - not only in the church. That doesn't mean that we turn the church into a political party or equate victory with forcing Biblical laws upon unwilling unbelievers. The kingdom is not advanced by outward coercion, as Jesus explained to Pilate when he told him that his kingdom was not from this world.

The gospel changing peoples' hearts, not political action, is the basic cause of true, lasting, social change - it is the gospel leaven in the parable that leavens the lump of the whole creation (Matthew 13); the kingdom (the church) is the mustard seed that becomes the tree that the birds all come and nest in, etc.